Tuesday, July 29, 2014         

 Print   Email   Comment | View 93 Comments   Most Popular   Save   Post   Retweet

Obama seeking congressional OK for Syria action

By David Espo

AP Special Correspondent

LAST UPDATED: 02:01 a.m. HST, Sep 01, 2013

WASHINGTON » Delaying what had loomed as an imminent strike, President Barack Obama abruptly announced he will seek congressional approval before launching any military action meant to punish Syria for its alleged use of chemical weapons in an attack that killed hundreds.

With Navy ships on standby in the Mediterranean Sea ready to launch their cruise missiles, Obama said he had decided the United States should take military action and that he believes he has "the authority to carry out this military action without specific congressional authorization."

At the same time, he said, "I know that the country will be stronger if we take this course and our actions will be even more effective." Congress is scheduled to return from a summer vacation on Sept. 9.

The president didn't say so, but his strategy carries enormous risks to his and the nation's credibility, which the administration has argued forcefully is on the line in Syria. Obama long ago said the use of chemical weapons was a "red line" that Syrian President Bashar Assad would not be allowed to cross with impunity.

Only this week, British Prime Minister David Cameron suffered a humiliating defeat when the House of Commons refused to support his call for military action against Syria.

Either way, the developments marked a stunning turn in an episode in which Obama has struggled to gain international support for a strike, while dozens of lawmakers at home urged him to seek their backing.

Halfway around the world, Syrians awoke today to state television broadcasts of tanks, planes and other weapons of war, and troops training, all to a soundtrack of martial music. Assad's government blames rebels in the Aug. 21 attack, and has threatened retaliation if it is attacked.

Russian President Vladimir Putin, saying he was appealing to a Nobel Peace laureate rather than to a president, urged Obama to reconsider. A group that monitors casualties in the long Syrian civil war challenged the United States to substantiate its claim that 1,429 died in a chemical weapons attack, including more than 400 children.

By accident or design, the new timetable gives time for U.N. inspectors to receive lab results from the samples they took during four days in Damascus, and to compile a final report. After leaving Syria overnight, the inspection team arrived in Rotterdam a few hours before Obama spoke.

The group's leader was expected to brief Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon on Sunday.

Republicans expressed satisfaction at Obama's decision, and challenged him to make his case to the public and lawmakers alike that American power should be used to punish Assad.

"We are glad the president is seeking authorization for any military action in Syria in response to serious, substantive questions being raised," House Speaker John Boehner of Ohio and other House Republican leaders said in a joint statement.

"In consultation with the president, we expect the House to consider a measure the week of September 9th. This provides the president time to make his case to Congress and the American people."

It appeared that effort at persuasion was already well underway.

The administration arranged a series of weekend briefings for lawmakers, both classified and unclassified, and Obama challenged lawmakers to consider "what message will we send to a dictator" if he is allowed to kill hundreds of children with chemical weapons without suffering any retaliation.

While lawmakers are scheduled to return to work Sept. 9, officials said it was possible the Senate might come back to session before then.

Obama said Friday he was considering "limited and narrow" steps to punish Assad, adding that U.S. national security interests were at stake. He pledged no U.S. combat troops on the ground in Syria, where a civil war has claimed more than 100,000 civilian lives.

With Obama struggling to gain international backing for a strike, Putin urged him to reconsider his plans. "We have to remember what has happened in the last decades, how many times the United States has been the initiator of armed conflict in different regions of the world, said Putin, a strong Assad ally. "Did this resolve even one problem?"

Even the administration's casualty estimate was grist for controversy.

The Syrian Observatory for Human Rights, an organization that monitors casualties in the country, said it has confirmed 502 deaths, nearly 1,000 fewer than the American intelligence assessment claimed.

Rami Abdel-Rahman, the head of the organization, said he was not contacted by U.S. officials about his efforts to collect information about the death toll in the Aug. 21 attacks.

"America works only with one part of the opposition that is deep in propaganda," he said, and urged the Obama administration to release the information its estimate is based on.

Obama was buffeted, as well, by some lawmakers challenging his authority to strike Syria without congressional approval, and also by others who urged him to intervene more forcefully than he has signaled he will.

In the hours before Obama's Rose garden announcement, he was joined at the White House by top advisers.

Vice President Joseph Biden, who had planned a holiday weekend at home in Delaware, was among them. So, too, were Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel, Secretary of State John Kerry and other top administration officials.

In the famously flammable Middle East, Israel readied for the possible outbreak of hostilities. The Israeli military disclosed it has deployed an "Iron Dome" missile defense battery in the Tel Aviv area to protect civilians from any possible missile attack from next-door Syria or any of its allies.

Missile defenses were deployed in the northern part of the country several days ago, and large crowds have been gathering at gas mask-distribution centers to pick up protection kits.

Associated Press writers Julie Pace, Josh Lederman, Matthew Lee and Kimberly Dozier in Washington; Zeina Karam, Yasmine Saker and Karin Laub in Beirut; and Geir Mouslon in Berlin contributed to this report.


U.S. government assessment: http://apne.ws/14etnyn

 Print   Email   Comment | View 93 Comments   Most Popular   Save   Post   Retweet

You must be subscribed to participate in discussions
By participating in online discussions you acknowledge that you have agreed to the TERMS OF SERVICE. An insightful discussion of ideas and viewpoints is encouraged, but comments must be civil and in good taste, with no personal attacks. Because only subscribers are allowed to comment, we have your personal information and are able to contact you. If your comments are inappropriate, you may receive a warning, and if you persist with such comments you may be banned from posting. To report comments that you believe do not follow our guidelines, email commentfeedback@staradvertiser.com.
Leave a comment

Please login to leave a comment.
LanaUlulani wrote:

Unfortunately Dictator Obama the WAR MONGER is attacking Syria after he made a unilateral decision to do so while pushing his proganda thus lies. It is just like the "Weapons of Mass Destruction" in Iraq. "We must act" they said only to find out it was lies!

My aloha goes out to all of Obama's VICTIMS.

on August 31,2013 | 07:57AM
Grimbold wrote:
The so called "proof" of gas attack by the Syrian government could have been easily falsified. The secret service could have fallen prey to fake information that was just produced for the US. Obama wants to save face , since he made that unthinking rash statement of a "red line". The pictures of dead children could have been easily faked by telling them to lie still while being filmed, and the convulsing adults could be just bad actors. Or the attack could have been from other parties. Intercepted radio messages could have been easily produced just for us. Why? Because the only party profiting from any gas attack would be the Islamist insurgents. They hope we will damage Assad. Assad may be a cruel dictator, but there are many dictators in other countries who we leave alone. And if he falls the moderate Muslims and Christians in Syria will be killed by Jihadists.
on August 31,2013 | 08:44AM
Pacej001 wrote:
Jeezo Beezo! The "Secret Service" has nothing to do with intelligence gathering. It protects the President and performs a few other functions within the Dept of the Treasury. As to your "could have beens", I guess it could have been space aliens, too, or "could have" been an unusually nasty sewer back up.
on August 31,2013 | 08:48AM
residenttaxpayer wrote:
Ha ha...funny
on August 31,2013 | 09:24AM
Grimbold wrote:
OK I meant CIA, and those people are "secret agents". But I would bet a very large sum to the fact that this chemical weapons attack (if it happened at all) was carried out by rebels to deliver a deliberate provocation to the Americans as excuse to bomb the Syrian government and army into oblivion. Everything else is just goofy chatter that defies logic and all common sense. Nothing is more absurd than the notion that Assad would get UN inspectors into the country and a few kilometers from the hotel commands a Sarin attack.
on August 31,2013 | 09:28AM
Pacej001 wrote:
Wouldn't put it past the Al Qaeda rebels to do as you suggest. Agree that the Syrian gov't seems to be winning, so why risk US involvement unnecessarily. Maybe they figured that Obama would do nothing serious anyway, so why not.
on August 31,2013 | 11:04AM
mcc wrote:
Like 911? You really believe that?
on August 31,2013 | 12:20PM
HD36 wrote:
My source says there is major internal conflict within our own government at the highest levels between the NSA and the Pentagon and between the white hats and black hats withing the CIA. One side represens the military industrial complex and the banks, the other side represents the Constitution.
on August 31,2013 | 02:00PM
pcman wrote:
IRT Pace and Grimbold. Intelligence gathering and management was increased significantly by Pres G.W. Bush because of reductions made by Clinton made the US unable to prevent 9/11. Unfortunately, Obama's closure of embassies in the Middle East and North Africa has impacted on intelligence collection in the region. The result is reliance on less than optimal intelligence sources to confirm the use of chemical weapons by Syrian government forces.
on August 31,2013 | 04:58PM
Peacenik wrote:
Agreed could've been the rebels trying to draw us into the war. O's imminent strike will cause civilian casualties far exceeding those who were gassed. Does he even read the papers anymore and listen to the people? Are we now seeing the real O, the grouchy, don't tell me what to do dictator? I hope Congress will stand their ground and learn from the mistakes of the past in Iraq, Egypt and Libya. If he comes here for Christmas. count me in as for protesting his visit. Nobel Peace Prize, yeah, right.
on August 31,2013 | 09:23AM
aomohoa wrote:
He is taking longer to decide that Bush would have. I am not a Democrat just to let you know.
on August 31,2013 | 12:21PM
niimi wrote:
Obama is actually following procedure--getting Congressional approval. Bush just went ahead and started bombing.
on August 31,2013 | 01:00PM
goinglobal wrote:
NO NO NO Bush had congressional authority on both Iraq and Afghanistan he did not wait for the UN. Unlike Obama who just bombed Libya without congressional approval and we all know how well that worked out dead ambassador and 3 other brave soles than a major cover up by the Obama Administration.... Now he wants to bomb another country yet he is the one with the Nobel Peace Prize go figure
on August 31,2013 | 03:04PM
pcman wrote:
IRT niimi on procedure. Obama did not obtain Congressional approval before bombing Libya. Both Bushes did so, as well as Clinton to attack Iraq. Check out Google an Operation Iraqi Freedom and Operation Enduring Freedom before lying about Bush. Obama is following procedures only now, after over a year of leading from behind when Syria first used chemical weapons.
on August 31,2013 | 05:12PM
Of course you realize that your statement holds no merit being that the era you are discussing had nothing to do with Obama-was Bush eh?
on August 31,2013 | 01:13PM
ya_think wrote:
This fool will start a world war just to satisfy his ego! There is proof already that the rebels are the ones who screwed up and accidentally exploded a few gas bombs on the towns in question.. What a fool you democrat's elected........
on August 31,2013 | 07:58AM
kukui_nut wrote:
Don't do it Prez!
on August 31,2013 | 08:15AM
serious wrote:
Agreed, Turkey and Jordan are their neighbors, let them keep the peace--heck we're what 3,000 miles away--and that's protecting the USA?
on August 31,2013 | 08:32AM
Ronin006 wrote:
If Syria should attack Turkey from the rear, do you think Greece might help?
on August 31,2013 | 09:15AM
palani wrote:
Only if the legislature calls a special session first.
on August 31,2013 | 01:37PM
false wrote:
IRT ronin006: Greek style fits your description.
on August 31,2013 | 02:16PM
aomohoa wrote:
The Greeks don't even like to work, you think they will want to fight? LOL
on August 31,2013 | 06:34PM
Skyler wrote:
Only false got it - the rest are s l o w . . . heh.
on September 1,2013 | 12:38AM
Maneki_Neko wrote:
He was boxed in. Do nothing and that whole "red line" rhetoric looked like baloney. Do something unilaterally and it would accomplish nothing (and probably backfire) and just divide the country more. This way he buys a week and a half and if Congress says "no" he gets off the hook and if Congress says "yes" he gets off the hook.

What a leader. From behind, always.

on August 31,2013 | 09:00AM
Keith_Rollman wrote:
I can't believe it! I agree with you.
on August 31,2013 | 09:36AM
Maneki_Neko wrote:
I sense a tear in the fabric of the universe.
on August 31,2013 | 09:54AM
aomohoa wrote:
What is going on today. I agree with Maneki Neko and I agreed with allie on something too. Is there something in the water?
on August 31,2013 | 12:23PM
false wrote:
Nah, just happy that Dave and da wahine team blasted Texas.
on August 31,2013 | 03:37PM
Grimbold wrote:
Hmpf, I agree with all of you too.
on August 31,2013 | 07:42PM
goinglobal wrote:
Remember President Trayvons famous leadership style talk late and carry no stick.... Laughing stock in foreign affairs...
on August 31,2013 | 03:06PM
jayz43 wrote:
Obama claims the misdeeds of the NSA, DOJ, IRS, EPA, Fast and Furious ad nauseum, are all “phony scandals”. He slinks to Congress to seek approval for an attack on Syria only because he has painted himself into a corner with his braggadocio and is looking for a way to “save face”. Is there ANYONE left who believes he is the “smartest man in the room”? We need to take a consensus from each of our 57 States.
on August 31,2013 | 05:11PM
purigorota wrote:
He talked the talk but couln't walk the walk.
on August 31,2013 | 09:05AM
Ronin006 wrote:
Obama blinked. He put himself in the proverbial corner a year ago when he threatened Assad with serious consequences if he crossed Obama’s Red Line and used weapons of mass destruction. Obama should have engaged his brain before he engaged his mouth, but he did not. When it was reported a week or two ago that Assad allegedly used chemical weapons to kill about 1,400 people, Obama said numerous times the US would take military action against Syria and would do it alone and without congressional approval. He blinked, voted “present,” and will now seek congressional approval to use force against the Assad regime. And Syria is claiming victory against the US. Obama is without doubt the weakest president we have ever had. His word no longer means anything to our friends and allies, if we still have any.
on August 31,2013 | 09:13AM
JAFO wrote:
Where is Executive Order that POTUS 44 is so found of using?
on August 31,2013 | 11:22AM
ehrhornp wrote:
Shame that it has to come to this. Obama, what the hell are you thinking of? Why are you trying to imitate GW Bush? You should be ashamed of yourself. Stop pushing for war!
on August 31,2013 | 09:17AM
Pacej001 wrote:
Well, if imitating Bush, he's doing a poor job. Bush took the matter of Iraq to the UN, secured congressional approval, prepared the American people, and assembled a coalition of 47 countries before acting. Obama has essentially committed our credibility in the Middle East without doing any of these.
on August 31,2013 | 10:34AM
ehrhornp wrote:
GW used suspicious info to justify war which turned out not to be true. I suspect the same applies here.
on August 31,2013 | 11:23AM
Pacej001 wrote:
Could be. However, it was indisputable that Saddam had actually begun a nuclear weapons program and that he continued to have the material and intellectual means to restart it, which, in fact, he repeatedly signaled that he would do. Even his own generals thought he had a WMD program.
on August 31,2013 | 01:02PM
palani wrote:
Yes, and if the use of chemical weapons "justifies" military intervention, even Obama would have gone all in.

Worst Chemical-Weapon Massacre In History

on August 31,2013 | 01:39PM
residenttaxpayer wrote:
Obama wants to bomb Syria cause Syria is bombing Syria?!....that makes a lot of sense.....good grief...
on August 31,2013 | 09:21AM
Grimbold wrote:
When Iraq under Saddam used poison gas against Iran back 1980 to 1988 we did nothing but arm him more, because then he was our ( and Israel's) "friend" because he was fighting Iran. Later, when Israel declared him an enemy because they felt threatened by him we killed him ( after being given false information about WMD's possible with Israel behind it) Rings a bell?
on August 31,2013 | 09:37AM
residenttaxpayer wrote:
So what does Iraq have to with Syria?
on August 31,2013 | 10:23AM
Grimbold wrote:
Israel wanted to get rid of either Government in both countries.
on August 31,2013 | 03:48PM
residenttaxpayer wrote:
Do you have proof? or are you making this up as you go along.....where is this evidence that would lend credence to this conspiracy theory?.....
on August 31,2013 | 07:44PM
ya_think wrote:
You do realize that the people who will take over Syria hate the Jews more than the ones running the country now? So why would they want to overthrow Assad?
on September 1,2013 | 03:36AM
Pacej001 wrote:
Evidence that "we killed him" because Israel said to do so? Evidence that Israel was behind the false intelligence? Don't think you have any.
on August 31,2013 | 11:06AM
goinglobal wrote:
We did not kill him we captured him and he was put to death by Iraqi courts...
on August 31,2013 | 12:38PM
Grimbold wrote:
same thing
on August 31,2013 | 07:43PM
ya_think wrote:
We are now finding out that Iraq did in fact have WMD's but they had been sent to Syria by the time we invaded Iraq!
on September 1,2013 | 03:38AM
mikethenovice wrote:
America must not resolve this alone. The other nations also have a vested interest to keep the peace alive. America must not bear the cost alone. In addition to asking Congress, we must also ask the UN for all nations to participate.
on August 31,2013 | 09:33AM
aomohoa wrote:
You hit it in a nut shell. OMG, you are the third person today that I almost never agree with. Must be something in the water.
on August 31,2013 | 12:25PM
IAmSane wrote:
All the liberals turned into war-mongering conservatives, and all the conservatives turned into anti-war liberals. It's a confusing time for everyone.
on August 31,2013 | 02:35PM
mikethenovice wrote:
almost never agrees on? Like almost scoring a point in sports.
on August 31,2013 | 06:44PM
Keith_Rollman wrote:
Smart move. This way he doesn't have to make a decision. Two days ago, no matter what he did, he'd have been wrong.
on August 31,2013 | 09:35AM
cojef wrote:
Actually after making statements about a year ago about crossing the "red line", with recent disclosures about the use of gas, he had to prime the military to be ready to strike. Recent polls indicated that the majority of the population is opposed to making the strike , the President was in a dilemma and thus, for political reasons he was able to extricate himself from having to eat his words and now can blame congress, if they decide against making a surgical strike. If the Congress decide to make the strike, it will be an ill advised move, since it would have given Assad ample time to move and secrete the gas cache. No matter what the decision is, it's a loses, lose situation for the US, being as all the costs involved in amassing the flotilla off the coast of Syria. All this could have been avoided if our President didn't open his big mouth about the "red line"
on August 31,2013 | 09:39AM
LittleEarl_01 wrote:
Hold onto your hats warriors, here we go again. Let's see after WWII, what has the US won, at a cost of thoursands and thousands of young men and women in uniform? Korea? NO! Viet Nam? NO! Iraq? NO! Afghanistan? NO! WOW! what a scorecard for the world's most powerful nation. Of course it's easy to sit in the White House or the halls of Congress and send our youth off to die on foreign soil. It's a safe zone.
on August 31,2013 | 09:51AM
Peacenik wrote:
Especially since he never served. Bush is starting to look better and better now. Never thought I'd ever say this.
on August 31,2013 | 11:12AM
ricekidd wrote:
Obama said he had decided the United States should take military action and that he believes he has "the authority to carry out this military action without specific congressional authorization." WOW I guess Punahou Grad think he's above the Law uh? AND HE is the one who studied Constitutional LAW in " did he go to College" College? Give a man a inch, he thinks he owns the measure stick.... And the people of Hawaii is blinded just because he"went" to Punahou.... Sheeples... goto sleep...
on August 31,2013 | 10:13AM
Pacej001 wrote:
Just. perfect. By tossing out his "red line" statement on chemical weapons, Obama all but committed the US to war against Syria and involvement in a civil war in which we will be guaranteed losers due to the fact that either possible winner will just become a new enemy. So what does our president do after making this declaration? Coalition building? Coordination behind the scenes with Congress? A full court press at the UN to line up sanctions? A robust planning effort including non military means of punishing Syria for crossing the "red line"? Preparation of the American public to understand why intervention might be necessary and the possible broader ramifications? Develop clearly identifiable, effective objectives and an exit strategy for action against Syria?---------- The answer seems to be NO to all. Now, after strong statements by the Sec State, he waffles and tosses the ball over to Congress. Worse still, this feckless, amaturish display rest on one bungled decision after another in the Middle east: His first term apology tour, his failure to seriously attempt to keep enough forces in Iraq to help stabilize/influence that country, his failure to offer any help to Iranians interested in changing their government, his half way involvement in Libya when Khadaffi presented no threat to us, and his brilliant maneuver with Egypt which has left us on the side of the Muslim Brotherhood.----- Now, after fully confusing our allies and emboldening our enemies with his lack of strength and willingness to just sit back and watch world events unfold, he has all but guaranteed that the action against Syria has to be extensive. Otherwise, our adversaries will have confirmed without a doubt that there's no real price to pay for use of chem, bio, or, possibly even nuclear weapons in regional conflicts. ---------------So, the end result of Obama's weakness is a greater likelihood of regional war in the Middle East.
on August 31,2013 | 10:29AM
JAFO wrote:
Wonder when or if ever, Obama will start acting like POTUS 44.
on August 31,2013 | 10:30AM
Pacej001 wrote:
When will he be ready for the job? Little late for us to collectively ask that question, particularly since the answer was obvious in 2008. What we should have said then was "Come back and give it a try after you've proved yourself in the private sector, tasted a couple of defeats, built a company, successfully done something, or just had a job for a substantial period of time, for crying out loud". But no. That sort of rational questioning of his qualifications was beyond us. Not necessary. His intentions seemed good enough, so who cares about the nuts and bolts. Well, as the old saying goes the Road to H@ll is paved with good intentions".
on August 31,2013 | 11:15AM
gaylec wrote:
One thing we do know for sure is that Obama is a disgrace to the country. A plain out and out embarrassment. All Americans are feeling the pain he is causing. He is an incompetent, ball-less wimp who likes playing Mr. Big. Throughout the world he is viewed as a clown. WHAT has he done to our country? God help us!
on September 1,2013 | 05:17AM
false wrote:
IRT JAFO: I guess that's what happens when a community organizer tries to be John Wayne. Empty suit making bad decisions. Yes, I did not vote for him because I thought he lacked any experience (I am an independent).
on August 31,2013 | 02:20PM
ISCREAM wrote:
He just wants someone to blame when things go badly...
on August 31,2013 | 11:17AM
reedosan wrote:
The USA must stay out of this religious war between our sworn enemy, the Muslims
on August 31,2013 | 11:41AM
livinginhawaii wrote:
Sad Barry has zero military experience and was placed in a position to command our military. Attacking Syria will be a huge mistake in securing world peace, mark my words...
on August 31,2013 | 12:15PM
primowarrior wrote:
By the time Congress acts on this, if ever, the war in Syria will be over.
on August 31,2013 | 12:24PM
noheawilli wrote:
Hawaii representatives stand up and be leaders and talk down your leader from his world dominating position. We do not need to get involved in this one, both sides already don't think much of the US.
on August 31,2013 | 12:24PM
false wrote:
Brian, our only male congressperson, is busy looking at his toy magic8 ball to decide. Not to worry.
on August 31,2013 | 03:44PM
Grimbold wrote:
Since Schatz is a Jew, will he vote against Israels interest in that region? And they are strongly in favor of disposing Assad.
on August 31,2013 | 03:52PM
ya_think wrote:
That is not true. They see who will replace him and it's not their friend.....
on September 1,2013 | 03:41AM
gaylec wrote:
Schatz is all about getting votes.
on September 1,2013 | 11:57AM
ya_think wrote:
While the two Wahines kneeling before the great O, following his every wish........
on September 1,2013 | 03:44AM
sailfish1 wrote:
SAy NO to military action against Syria. Let the Arab League take care of their own backyard for once.
on August 31,2013 | 12:25PM
scooters wrote:
Mother May I? Remember that game? That's what AL Obama is playing. Can't make a decision on his own. Priceless
on August 31,2013 | 12:58PM
niimi wrote:
The other way to look at this is Obama is a wimp like Bush Sr. was.
on August 31,2013 | 01:00PM
pcman wrote:
IRT niimi on Bush Sr. Who is this guy anyway? Doesn't he know how to Google? First, BushSr was a fighter pilot in WW II and was shot down in the Pacific War. As President, Bush Sr, initiated Operation Desert Storm which destroyed the Iraqi military because Saddam used chemical weapons and invaded Kuwait, an ally of the US. He did it the right way with both Congressional approval and UN coalition support. He waited for over 6 months to surmount a sizeable coalition military force before attacking Iraq. C'mon niimi quit lying to a very sophisticated SA blogger base.
on August 31,2013 | 06:15PM
kuewa wrote:
Many of the Repubs who are now demanding Congressional pre-approval for a single strike are the same ones who less than a year ago were demanding that the President provide arms and other support to the Syrian opposition. Two faced.
on August 31,2013 | 01:43PM
false wrote:
kuewa: Which Repubs please.
on August 31,2013 | 02:26PM
pcman wrote:
IRT kuewa on two-faced. Providing arms to the Syrian rebels would not commit US military forces. Putting US Navy ships and AF aircraft in harms way can result in US forces being killed. Big difference, don't you think?
on August 31,2013 | 06:19PM
HD36 wrote:
He won't do it. If he does, he won't get past the airport at the G20 meeting next week in Russia.
on August 31,2013 | 02:04PM
tutulois wrote:
Well, we can all breathe easy. This Congress can't decide anything. If they sense Obama is for something, they'll be against it, no matter what. Should be interesting to watch the Congress twist around this one.
on August 31,2013 | 03:03PM
HatchKelso wrote:
Let's bomb Syria. Yes we can! Yes we can! Change we can believe in.
on August 31,2013 | 03:41PM
jussayin wrote:
What a dummy. Next president please.
on August 31,2013 | 04:41PM
Mana07 wrote:
Where in the eff do you think Syria got the WMDs? Little clue...they came in through a continuous convoy from IRAQ in 2003 before we went in.
on August 31,2013 | 04:50PM
IAmSane wrote:
LOL Saddam and Assad hated each other.
on August 31,2013 | 06:20PM
ya_think wrote:
Not true. They had different opinions on things maybe, but when it came time it was us against the USA.........
on September 1,2013 | 03:46AM
Mana07 wrote:
Where are the libs threatening Obama with war crime charges if he goes in?
on August 31,2013 | 04:51PM
IAmSane wrote:
I don't know, where are all the cons with the "if you're against the war, you're anti-American"?
on August 31,2013 | 06:25PM
mikethenovice wrote:
We could also choose not to start a war that would lower America to the Syrian's level of killing humans. Innocent bystanders would be affected when we really want to target the Syrian military. We could just hit them in the pocket book by not buying oil from them.
on August 31,2013 | 06:46PM
Shotzy wrote:
This poor excuse for a President has raised a coalition of one Country. France. The really sad part is, that HE, Himself, drew the red line. Now we look like Morons, Obama, you sir are useless.
on August 31,2013 | 06:53PM
Kahu Matu wrote:
Take action against atrocities here in America! if Obama cares about the murdering of children, oppose abortion!
on August 31,2013 | 10:13PM
gaylec wrote:
Why didn't our clown president do something about Benghazi except keep it quiet, or IRS scandal or Fast and Furious, and I could go on. His ego and big mouth and lack of paying attention to what is going on is making the entire country look bad in the eyes of the world. Will we survive three more years with this idiot?
on September 1,2013 | 12:04PM
Breaking News